Similarities Don’t Prove Evolution

So-called homologous structures are no proof of common descent, so are no proof of evolution.

Charles Darwin believed
that similar structures in different
animals strongly suggested
a common evolutionary
ancestor for them.

‘What can be more curious’, he
said, ‘than that the hand of a man,
formed for grasping, that of a mole for
digging, the leg of the horse, the paddle
of the porpoise, and the wing of the bat,
should all be constructed on the same
pattern, and should include similar
bones, in the same relative positions?’1

Darwin concluded that this similarity
was, as he quoted Professor Flower,
‘powerfully suggestive of true relationship,
of inheritance from a common
ancestor’.2

But this still-common idea is not in the slightest a proof of evolution. It is simply an assumption by those who reject creation.

This idea that a fundamental similarity
in structures is due to common
descent is called homology. But this
still-common idea is not in the slightest
a proof of evolution. It is simply an
assumption by those who reject creation.

Darwin revealed this was his position
when he said some believe ‘that it
has pleased the Creator to construct all
the animals and plants in each great
class on a uniform plan’. He finished
that sentence by saying, ‘but this is not
a scientific explanation.’3 He was
therefore ruling out the possibility of
creation based on a common plan by
implying it was not scientific, so he
wouldn’t believe it whether it was true
or not.

In many cases what are called homologous organs are produced
by the action of different genes.4 For example, you could
change by mutation the gene that governed the development of the alleged ancestral
vertebrate forelimb a million times and never produce, say, a seal’s
flipper or man’s arm. Their development is controlled by different genes.5 (See ‘A
serious problem for homology’ also in this magazine.)

Even similarities among somewhat similar creatures reveal that
the differences are more important than the similarities. For example,
look at the hands of four primates: tarsier, gibbon, chimpanzee,
and human. Despite the similarities in their hands, the differences are
what makes each most suitable for its way of life. The tarsier leaps
and clings, and has large finger pads to help it do this. The gibbon swings
from the trees, so has long, strong fingers for swinging. The chimpanzee may
be able to manipulate very crude tools with its stubby thumb, but the human’s thumb
faces the forefinger, which provides dexterity for countless purposes—from
threading a needle to mountain climbing…from carving wood to buttoning
a shirt.

So-called homologous structures are no proof of common descent,
so are no proof of evolution. Darwin’s approach—to reject the creation
explanation as unscientific because you don’t want to believe it—is
not rational. This is particularly so when the facts are readily explained
as the product of a Designer who created each unique structure to fulfill a
different purpose.

Newsletter

Thank You!

Thank you for signing up to receive email newsletters from Answers in Genesis.

Whoops!

Your newsletter signup did not work out. Please refresh the page and try again.

Answers in Genesis is an apologetics ministry, dedicated to helping Christians defend their faith and proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ effectively. We focus on providing answers to questions about the Bible—particularly the book of Genesis—regarding key issues such as creation, evolution, science, and the age of the earth.